Stop the noise

In article , Roger Halstead
wrote:

And if you want to see the height of anti aviation fascism, check out
http://pages.prodigy.net/rockaway/newsletter229.htm
Anyone else seen this garbage? These people have way too much time on
their hands.

I may be wrong, but it seems like "ol' Bill" tried to get his license
once and failed. Now has it in for anything to do with aviation.
Course I could just be mis-remembering. That did happen one time when
I thought I was wrong, but really was so... never mind.

Perhpas you are confusing a fish with the long island looney bird.

--
Bob Noel

"Tarver Engineering" wrote in message
...

It is your problem if you lie about it, just as you are also lying about
my
going to the FSDO about the POH. I never did any such thing.

You posted up a letter from the FSDO on the subject at rai.


Bet you can't show me that post.

I don't even
remember arguing with you about the subject. It is not something that I
think I would care much about. Near as I can tell you are again
misrepresenting my views and actions.

The POH and icing limitations has been an ongoing debate at rai for some
years.

I did post a letter about icing limitations, but it was not to prove that
the POH was "part of the type certificate," which is what you originally
asserted.

"Tarver Engineering" wrote in message
...

"C J Campbell" wrote in message
...

"Tarver Engineering" wrote in message
...


You are quite right, but at this point a compromise is not likely.

Then the pilots will lose.

We may finally agree on something there. Unfortunately, I don't see what
more the pilots can do.

The attitude of your previous posts is the opposite of waht is needed.
Just
giving people the impression that you care about their noise concerns will
help.

Apparently you are the only person in the whole world that has the
impression that I do not care about noise concerns. How you got that
impression was through deliberately misrepresenting what I said.

"Roger Halstead" wrote
snipped, airport situation

Man, your city mustve taken lessons from mine, or vice versa. Damn
near carbon copy with their tactics, glad we're not alone. Lets see...
Neighbors fight runway extension for same reason, they dont buy our
argument that we'd be higher when over their house - more of a head
start, etc.
Blatant lies by the neighbors about who was doing what.
Once they were threatened with the equivalent of liens put against
their properties due to their constant mostly fabricated noise complaints
they chilled, for a while.
One of the complainers is making money on the airport now with a
portable bbq business, but I'm sure he's paying nothing in rent.
The city plays games with the airport fund, money that should go into
it somehow shows up in the general fund.
It's the only airport/city in the state that anyone knows about that you
pay a hefty sales tax/use fee when you bring an airplane there and
base it there.
What little money is in the airport fund, the city uses on binoculars,
camcorders, and radios given to the biggest airport opponents. Which
of course they use to further their cause.
When the city asked me to be a mediator with the neighbors I turned
them down until they level the playing field and quit subsidizing
this anti-airport campaign. I still deal with them privately though,
you can't just ignore them and shut them out.
Chris

That's great! It never occurred to me that this whole problem is *because*
Moore AAF was closed down. It's a great suggestion for STN to get the
airspace made inaccessible to aerobatics like they want- reopen the
airfield, and put a few E-to-the ground instrument approaches in! Seems to
me the "No airlines/FedEx at Hanscom" crowd should be all over this, too.


"Jessie Carlson" wrote in message
...


Jeremy Lew wrote:

I'm not defending the way these people are dealing with their issues,
but
the pratice area for the KBED-based flight school which is involved in
these
suits is 15-20 NM away from the airport. If that's "near", then it's
practically impossible to live in eastern Massachusetts without being
near
three or four airports. It would be entirely unreasonable for
prospective
house buyers to consider that small plane noise might be a problem in
this
area.

If anyone is interested, the practice area in question is NW of KBED, N
of
the Ft. Devens MOA.

Yes the ironic thing is that the Fort Devens airfield (Moore Army
Airfield,
KAYE) would have made a lovely airport, especially for cargo operations,
with
excellent adjacent Rail and Freeway connections. The locals made sure
this
never happened when the Army Base closed.

So now we have two large runways with X's all over them. (State police
use one
of the former runways for high speed driving training).

With Moore field closed, the local airspace is available for a training
area.

It certainly did not sound like a troll. Some of his specifics were
nonsense. His general point was not. Burgoyne's web rants might be
overcome, but continuing to dismiss rational and reasonable opponents will
eventually kill aerobatics near most major cities. Deal with it, work
with them, or face extinction.

"Kevin" wrote in message
newsiE9c.118065$_w.1382198@attbi_s53...
John Doe wrote:
On Sun, 28 Mar 2004 05:24:25 GMT, "SeeAndAvoid"

wrote:


I know I'm not alone in these groups that this is all very disturbing.
Especially if you are operating legally within the regs and being
threatened
in one way or another. I was once, ONCE. (Johnny Dangerously
reference).
Time to take the
fight back to them.


Then you shall have one, Chris.


This is precisely the problem.

(big snip)
That's the way it is. The ball's in your court. Unless the aviation
community
and perhaps the FAA can work out a helpful response,.the path is going
to be
regrettably clear.

Thank you for reading this.


Sounds like a troll.

A million dollar damages? C'mon, don't you get it? As long as the
possibility exists that a court may be prepared to award these kinds of
damages for these kinds of reasons, and there are plenty of examples to show
that some will, then there are always going to be people who are going to
'try their luck'. Sign of the times I'm afraid.

Rick.

"Chris Schmelzer" wrote in message
...
In article ,
(airads) wrote:

Feb. 24 - The Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association on Tuesday
provided initial support to four Massachusetts pilots - all AOPA
members - facing a lawsuit filed by a few residents. The suit alleges
that the noise signature from the aerobatics performed by the pilots
caused significant harm; they are seeking approximately $1 million in
damages. The pilots are based at various airports, some 20 miles from
the homes of the litigants.

"This is potentially an issue that could affect all pilots engaged in
any type of air commerce - from a Cub to a 747," said AOPA President
Phil Boyer. "We are fully prepared to take this through the federal
system if necessary.



AWWWW, people living in the city hear a lot of noise

First we made it so trains couldn't sound their horns to keep the quiet
and smack

Now we can't fly because the noise from a few airplanes does a MILLION
dollars in damage?

How do you quantify that exactly? I live on the right traffic pattern
of our local (heavily utilized for training) airport and I LOVE to look
up at what is coming over....

Shoot, the locals tried to shut down the medical evac helicopter we fly
out of the University of Michigan a few years ago because of the noise!
MEDICAL EVACUATION to a level one trauma center! #7 Hospital in the
nation..More worried about noise than PEOPLES LIVES!

sigh....suburbanites..

"Javier Henderson" wrote in message
...

Ahm...can you tone down your drivel a tad? Specifically, the personal
attacks. I don't recall having done that to you in the past.

Actually, I thought your post was a personal attack. I certainly took it
that way.


Now, I picked your three arguments and replied to just those because
that's all I wanted to comment on. I have seen those same arguments
used by others before,

Anything untrue about them? All I am saying is that the legal remedies
sought by Stop the Noise are a waste of time and money and likely to produce
nothing that will help solve the problem. If I was considering starting a
Stop the Noise chapter I would sure want to know about that.

I think there are things that can be done to reduce the noise problem but it
appears that the only possible 'solutions' anyone is willing to look at are
those that move the noise somewhere else, like Montana or, preferably, the
far side of the moon. That being the case, I don't see things improving for
a long time.

On Mon, 29 Mar 2004 22:43:45 GMT, "Flying Squirrel"
wrote:

It certainly did not sound like a troll. Some of his specifics were
nonsense. His general point was not. Burgoyne's web rants might be
overcome, but continuing to dismiss rational and reasonable opponents will
eventually kill aerobatics near most major cities. Deal with it, work
with them, or face extinction.

You missed the whole point of the reply.

I quoted a number of things we do to try to stay good neighbors,
dealing with them and not dismissing rational complaints. The
original post still appears to me to be either a troll or crank.

I have seen no posts on here that dismiss the problem.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

"Kevin" wrote in message
newsiE9c.118065$_w.1382198@attbi_s53...
John Doe wrote:
On Sun, 28 Mar 2004 05:24:25 GMT, "SeeAndAvoid"

wrote:


I know I'm not alone in these groups that this is all very disturbing.
Especially if you are operating legally within the regs and being
threatened
in one way or another. I was once, ONCE. (Johnny Dangerously
reference).
Time to take the
fight back to them.


Then you shall have one, Chris.


This is precisely the problem.

(big snip)
That's the way it is. The ball's in your court. Unless the aviation
community
and perhaps the FAA can work out a helpful response,.the path is going
to be
regrettably clear.

Thank you for reading this.


Sounds like a troll.

In article ,
"Ed Haywood" wrote:

"Roger Halstead" wrote in message

If the AOPA is serious they really need to come up with a good
countersuit that would cost those filing the original lawsuit far more
than what they are aksing. That they have caused great financial harm
(pilots having to sell planes to meet expenses) is already an arguing
point.


This was a hot topic of discussion on the aerobatics e-mail list last fall.

I wonder how truly serious AOPA is about this issue. They had to be dragged
kicking and screaming into the fight. They got a lot of angry letters and
cancelled memberships before they did anything. To their credit, once they
realized how lame they looked, they did take action to correct it.

Playing "dueling lawyers" won't have the desired effect. The founder of STN
is a Boston lawyer who does all the legal work himself. He has a reputation
of using lawsuits to bully others. You can't cost him more than his time,
which he already donates willingly.



Why not take the matter up with the MA State Bar Assn.? I'm sure that
his methods would skirt the limits of ethics. Maybe you can get him
disbarred.